Re: Bug#265352: grub: Debian splash images for Grub
On Sat, 25 Sep 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
> > Yet unlike the software patent or export case, it *is* within the power of
> > the software writer to grant the permission that's being denied. He can
> > say "I don't care if you misrepresent me. Go ahead and don't give me credit."
> > The "other obligations" that demand credit are coming from him in the same
> > way that the obligation to obey Debian's trademark comes from Debian.
> That would cause Debian to lose its trademark rights over the logo in
> question. It's a defensible position that Debian should own no
> trademarks, though not one I share. I invite you to argue it, or to
> cease trying to bring it about silently.
My point was exactly the opposite. I'm not saying that Debian should grant
trademark permissions--I'm saying that, going by the precedent of the
scientific credit example in the FAQ, Debian doesn't have to grant any
trademark permissions for it to count as open source.
In the FAQ example, the scientist can say "this doesn't excuse you from
following outside obligations, such as giving credit". That doesn't disqualify
it from being open source even though the scientist could waive those
obligations himself. Likewise, Debian should be able to say "this doesn't
excuse you from other obligations such as trademark laws", and it's still
open source--even though the trademark obligations could be (but aren't)
waived by Debian.
Reply to: